Model Railroad Planning 2014

Just got my copy of Model Railroad Planning 2014 direct from Kalmbach Publishing. As usual, it is full of interesting articles and some excellent model railroad photography.

The first article is "operating a busy passenger terminal" which is based on the New Orleans Passenger Terminal (NOUPT). The modelled station is huge and exceptionally well done, including fully lit interiors. The layout is HO scale.

The next article is the "Southern Pacific's Siskiyou Line" in N scale. The layout size is 25 x 27 feet which is pretty big for an N scale layout. One of the things I like about the articles in MRP is the emphasis on the decision-making process in designing a layout. This article didn't disappoint in that department.

"Alice Street in 4x8 feet" is a prototypical track plan based on the Santa Fe rail-marine operation out of Oakland, California. There are some fascinating historical photos (B&W) here.

The next article is called "A moving experience" about a layout built for a newly purchased retirement home. The original layout based on Moscow, Idaho (I think the Americans pronounce it moss-cow) was featured in Model Railroad Planning in 2008.

My favourite article is "Switching for breakfast". This article describes the prototypical train operations for switching (shunting) the large Post Cereals food complex at Battle Creek, Michigan. A description of a typical shift switching the industry was very informative. For me, the best part of the article was a table showing the different spots (positions) within the Post Cereals complex that had to be switched with what particular product (receiving and shipments).  This table alone gave me plenty of food for thought in just what variety can be achieved with a single, large industry on a model railroad. A HO and N scale track plan accompanies the article providing suggestions for how the prototype can be modelled.

A short article on five layouts in four different scales that occupy 14 x 34 inches was next.

Lance Mindheim follows with an article, "Simple plan, plenty of action" based on a southeastern USA switching layout. Lance makes a nice distinction between planning and design - planning deals with more strategic issues that will inform the decisions about overall layout design (track arrangements, for example.). The suggested model railroad layout plan is for a room size of 12 x 13 feet. Lance includes both a plan of the layout and a plan showing switching options.

"Big train, small layout" has an interesting circular design based on a figure eight. It is a portable layout used for model railroad exhibitions and is a little bit different to the norm.

Byron Henderson's article, "North Western's Chicago commute" offers some thoughts about a model railroad track plan 8 x 20 foot in size. The layout is based on the Chicago & North Western's commuter services between the North Western station and the western suburbs of Chicago. Again, the thinking behind the layout design is what is key to this article.

"Slogging up to Locust Summit" is a model railroad based on the Reading Co.'s train operations over Locust Summit near Gordon, Pennsylvania. The track plan fits into a space of 31 x 40 feet and includes plenty of big hauling steam locomotives on this predominantly coal-hauling route. An interesting depiction of a typical day at Gordon gives a nice summary on operations. There are some nice model photographs in this article as well.

Tony Koester next goes out on a bit of a limb with an idea about modelling the same town on two decks and switching cars between them. This idea could be a way to save on available space.

My other favourite article from Model Railroad Planning 2014 is the article by James McNab: "Choosing the right place at the right time". The article describes the importance of time and place in consideration of design and the need for being selective about motive power and rolling stock. It is important to balance traffic levels for certain times of the year (for example, seasonal factors play a major role in agricultural production). James' layout is the Iowa Interstate Grimes Line. The article has both model and prototype photos. Videos of this layout are available on the Model Railroader website to registered viewers: see www.ModelRailroader.com

Model Railroad Planning 2014 ends with articles on staging yards, improving a published (Atlas) track plan, space-saving use of "wye-less wyes", dummy tracks, and modelling a passenger terminal in 15 x 18 feet.

While the focus of the annual is on US modelling and prototypes, there is enough information and thinking potential here for anyone interested in model railways to find something of use. As usual, this publication is of high quality and recommended.

Time and distance

One of the difficulties model railways have is in dealing with time and distance.

Layouts that want an operational focus will have to come to terms with the fact that the scale distance between towns on the model railroad can in no way approximate the prototype. We already seek to compress towns and yards to fit within our defined model railroad space as best we can. Trying to actually compress real distance between towns is even more difficult due to limitations on model railroad space.

And when the distance between towns is relatively short on our model railroads, the amount of time a train takes between those towns is also relatively short.

For the most part we get by with using fast clocks. Fast clocks seek to reduce "real" time to model time so that we can have some useful timetable operation. It's no good using real time when the time it takes for your train to travel between Town A and Town B is ten seconds! By using a fast clock we can pretend that the train took ten minutes or forty minutes or whatever between towns.

The time factor, even with a fast clock, also faces the problem that it is often the case that as the head of the train arrives at Town B, its tail is just leaving Town A! While the distance between towns will depend on overall layout size, I have operated very large model railroads in the US where this is still a problem.

In essence, if we want to try and replicate time and distance on the model railroad based on the prototype, it is damned hard to do well. This leads to compromise and ingenious proxies (like the fast clock) to help us manage as best we can.

However, I am thinking of an alternative solution. I haven't calculated the exact times to use just yet, so please just stay with me at the conceptual level at this stage!

On my proposed US layout, one option for my layout plan is to have a key junction station as the starting point, a large station and yard in the middle of the layout footprint for interchange, and then continue along the branch to another junction station for the remainder (including modelling a couple of the intermediate towns here).

In this scenario, the first "half" of the layout will be the first station and the middle station with no modelled towns/yards in between. I am therefore skipping 2 intermediate towns from the prototype because I don't have the space and they aren't operationally interesting enough to warrant inclusion on this part of the layout. What this means is that I would have two stations close to each other on the layout but on the prototype they are actually 60 miles (97km) apart. Using a fast clock in this scenario won't really work.

There is a peninsula between the two towns and I want to enclose this curved section in a shadow box. It is not considered part of "the railway". It won't be scenicked and the top of the box will be used by the dispatcher for his paperwork. As such, this curved section on the model railway does not really exist! This section will also need to be long enough (and hidden) to hold a complete train so train length becomes an issue too.

My idea is to hold the train in this "hidden" section while I run a real time/scale time sequence that will represent the time and distance between the two major towns I am modelling on the layout, but representing the 60 real miles apart on the prototype.

The travel of my model train (distance and time) will be represented by four lights, each representing the four towns on this section of the prototype. The first light goes on when the train leaves the first modelled station and yard (the junction - Town A). The train enters the curved shadow box around the peninsula and stops, being now fully enclosed and not visible at either end. A second light now comes on and the first light goes out. The second light indicates that the train has "arrived" at the second (unmodelled) station. After (say) thirty real seconds, the second light goes off and a third light goes on, representing the next unmodelled town. After another thirty seconds, the third light goes out and the fourth light comes on to indicate that the train is now (under power) entering the fourth town which is the mid-town on the layout that is actually modelled. We have now used a proxy for the time and distance between two modelled towns, including the two unmodelled intermediate towns.

I appreciate the fact that we will have the train operator/s waiting for over a real 60 seconds to get his/her train from Town A to Town D. And most of this real time is actually just waiting for some lights to go on and off before moving the train into the next station and yard on the model railroad. I figure that if I had the space and had actually modelled those two small intermediate towns, then the real time factor of the train moving between Town A and Town D would be the same or more. So pretending to run the train through those unmodelled intermediate towns shouldn't be much of a strain.

By holding up the train off-stage between modelled stations (or in the space-time warp I would prefer to call it), I am using a proxy for the time and distance between two towns, some 60 real miles apart on the prototype.

Comments welcome....

Winmar is no more

My New South Wales-based prototype layout, Winmar, finally came to an end last Sunday. I had been progressively dismantling the layout over the past three months and all that remained last weekend was the outside frame, the traverser, and some internal bracing (see photo).

The track had been removed some time ago and I had cut away most of the timberwork and the baseboard top. Anton's 60' turntable and the associated wiring had also been removed. The control panel was disconnected from the multitude of wires that fed into it (photo below - don't get confused by the orientation; the panel was actually sitting lengthwise on the floor but I reoriented the photo to make the panel easier to read ). All the wiring on the layout was disconnected from the track and point motors and much of it can be used again.

It was actually quite sad after the 16' x 8' outside frame had been totally unbolted and unscrewed from the woodwork. My dad had built the frame and the baseboard lattice grid for me back in the 1970s, using aluminium for the outside frame which I think was pretty revolutionary at the time. He bolted the aluminium outside frame to a wooden frame that comprised four sides and a 12" lattice grid supporting the baseboard (but obviously not including the operating well in the centre). He screwed every screw into the 12'' wooden lattice grid inside the frame by hand - and there were hundreds of those damn screws.

Later, I added risers and put a new plywood top on the frame and gridwork. Trackwork followed many years (and many houses) later. Scenery was postponed when it was clear that a move from Sydney to Canberra was beckoning around 2008. Since then, I have lived in four different houses. The current house has a double garage with a wall down the centre that splits the garage in two - each half being just wide enough for Winmar to fit but not allowing any movement of the 12 track traverser (fiddle yard). The traverser (photo below) was salvaged from the layout frame last Sunday and can be used again, given the right circumstances.

I now have an almost empty half-garage (albeit still prone to water seepage when it rains) which is waiting for some decisions as to how it will be used in the future. Competing for the space (in both halves of the garage) are the two cars that currently sit outide on the driveway. In Canberra, housing vehicles is a little more pressing than in more temperate climates like Sydney.

I recently had a couple of quotes for a carport out the front of the garage for the two cars. Alas, the carport would be outside the building line and unlikely to get official approval. The other option would be to see if we could add a second storey above the garage for a hobby room! I hear from some mates who were visiting model railraod layouts in Texas last year that building a second storey above the house or garage for a train layout is not as unusual as one might think! Obviously there's a cost to be considered with this option well above that for any possible (unapproved) carport.

The two Davids who helped me on Sunday with the final dismantling of Winmar were sure supportive of the second-storey above-the-garage option but I wonder how they'd feel if I started asking for building construction donations!

New Zealand Model Railway Convention - Part 3

The third day of the New Zealand Model Railway Convention in Christchurch was Sunday 4th April. The weather had turned cold and overcast which was a pity since the afternoon activity included a trip to Ferrymead Heritage Park and some 1:1 steam train action. More on that later.

The morning clinics included "Freelance modelling", "Desert scenery", "Image manipulation", and "NZ scenery". I went to the clinic on New Zealand scenery and I was not disappointed. Barry Fitzgerald and John Dudson gave a great presentation on making and displaying some typical New Zealand trees and vegetation. Referring to my notes, I recorded the following dot points:

• look for particular motifs specific to the location you're modelling - helps to identify the location and give credibility to the scene - but motifs need to complement each other
  
• look for typical scenery and the familiarity of everyday life
• study the local architecture and apply to your modelling
• "detail is not overcrowding"
• provide for lineside interest (e.g. cameo scenes)

In particular, the presentation demonstrated the making of New Zealand cabbage trees using the paper star method (a method that seemed to be recognised by my New Zealand compatriots but not by me!). The technique goes something like this:

• use paper or thin cardboard (the suggested paper thickness was 80-85 gsm) to cut out a round-shaped disc of a size suitable for your cabbage tree foliage in your scale (S scale in this example)

• divide into quadrants in order to ensure even cuts around the disc to create "leaves"
  
• use scissors for the cutting (be careful not to cut through the centre or you won't have a disc anymore, but only part of a disc)
• put a pin through the centre (hence the "paper star" look)
• fold the "leaves" back and repeat process with more discs to build up layers of foliage until you have sufficient for your tree head
  
• you can add a lower fringe of grey paper "leaves" to represent dead or dried fronds
• select a suitable twig for the trunk and secure the "paper stars" head using PVA glue
• add additional fronds with green paper to the top using the same paper star method
• tease out the "leaves" or fronds to match the shape of the real-life cabbage trees
• paint paper stars shades of green or brown or yellow as appropriate
  
• add cabbage trees together in clumps on your layout

More scenery tips:

• build scenery on the layout from the ground up
• look for colour, texture, and variety (e.g. at every step you have a colour option)
• static grass is a good scenery method but use different shades of scenery flock
• important to blend colours to overcome the "same look" (a suggestion was to make up a colour chart of colour shades, particularly in the green and brown colour ranges)
• use rock moulds for modelling rock outcrops but pay attention to colour shades (recommend using Woodland Scenics colour range of paints)
• for concrete, "Tradeset 45" plaster recommended (sets in 45 minutes)

There was also a demonstration of making a conifer using a suitable stick and "sea foam".

The second session of clinics on Sunday morning included "Track matters" with Iain Rice, "Modelling in the garden", Adapting RTR locos", and "Operation NZ style". I attended this latter clinic on model railway layout operation by Trevor James. Trevor based his talk on his own S scale NZR prototype layout, currently under the moniker of "My layout"! Trevor introduced his (absolutely beautiful) layout with a track plan and photos, based on a fictional railway line between Auckland and Wellington (on the North Island). The track plan looks like a figure eight in the middle of a surrounding single main line and featuring two big towns (Waimarino and Tipapa Junction) and end points (Auckland and Wellington) as off-scene staging.

Trevor explained how he applied the common US model railway operation method of cards and waybills. The planning process and use of an operating system went something like this:

• a point-to-point layout with two main intermediate towns towns, a couple of smaller settlements, and off-scene staging at both ends representing Auckland and Wellington
  
• a "wish list" determined key features on the layout (e.g. a wharf scene, bridges, farming, a swamp, industries, etc.)
• it was also important to give the layout a reason-for-being (e.g. traffic generation)
• establish appropriate industries and position on the layout
• design a timetable for trains on the layout ( time a locomotive as it runs around the layout and get times between stations; then using a train in each direction, build up a sequence of trains and times)
• establish type of train (express goods, etc.) and position in the timetable
• trial and error will help set an acceptable timetable from which to work from
• further detail can be added to include instructions on what to do at particular locations throughout the layout, taking into account other trains that might also be around (this layout operates one train in each direction with single line running)
• draw up work orders for each train, based on the type of wagons you have, the industries to serve, and the timetable
• from what I recall, the information was initially put into Microsoft Excel
  
• later, Trevor experimented with a computerised car card system called ShipIt
• ShipIt requires lists of rolling stock, locomotives, guards vans, trains, towns, shippers, products, consignees, etc.
• inputing all the necessary information into ShipIt was tedious and repetitive but Trevor said he would persevere!
• the conclusion of the talk was that creating a focus on operation was a realistic and enjoyable way to run trains on his layout

After lunch, there was another afternoon of layout tours to enjoy. The layouts I visited were in the New Brighton area of Christchurch and included British N and OO gauge, US N and G scale, S and O scale NZR, and a huge HO/OO/S layout that had examples of pretty much all the major model train prototypes from across the world! Afterwards, we had time to visit Ferrymead Heritage Park. I have included some pictures from Ferrymead below, including the two steam locomotives in operation on the day











The last photo shows my NZ compatriots (the three chaps at the back) with whom I enjoyed a pleasant Sunday afternoon visiting home layouts and the wonderful Ferrymead Heritage Park. Thank you, one and all.

New Zealand Model Railway Convention - Part 2

Well, I'd better catch up with my report of the New Zealand Model Railway Convention from Christchurch at Easter (a few weeks ago now).

Day 2 was on Saturday 3rd April. The morning started with a number of concurrent clinics. The clinics included "modelling with CAD" and "NZ scenery". I went to the clinic on layout design by Iain Rice. This presentation followed on from Iain's presentation the previous day. I made some notes during the session in my usual dot point format which I will use here.

Layout design:

• design for realism and visual effect
• take a natural viewpoint (the way the layout will be viewed compared to how we view the prototype - the two are not the same)
• design with consistency when it comes to standards and quality (without a consistent display, variation to standards and quality become obvious and detract from the display)
• accurate observation of the prototype and layout are critical, especially vegetation
• use natural colours - colour intensity recedes with distance; restrained colours more appropriate than stark, bright colours; requires superb observation and translation to model; and backdrops are important to finish off scenes

Iain then went on to describe some methods to employ when planning a layout.

• Need to look at the combined relationship between layout height, viewpoint & backscene
• Need to pin down the horizon. In real life, the horizon is the eye level to the edge of the visible earth. Therefore, we need to account for the horizon on our model the same way, paying attention to the position of the skyline above (hills) or below (valleys) the horizon.
  

The functions of the backscene:

• cut out distractions and focus attention on the layout
  
• give the impression of distance and depth to a layout
• establishes the horizon (viewing perspective)
• contains the scene
• complements the model display

Lighting:

• layout lighting enhances the way a layout is observed by the viewer
• lighting affects the way colour on the layout is perceived (i.e. prototype v. model colours)
• light at back of scene to kill off shadows from light at the front of the display

Composition of layout design:

• need for the right balance between the position of vertical and horizontal scenic elements
• needs to be visually appealing
• suggests the use of view blocks to focus a viewer's attention in order to showcase a particular scene or to "discourage" the close examination of a scene or scenic element. Thus, view blocks can direct a view or block a view.
• the span of vision for humans is 3' (36 inches) for a view 4' 6" (54 inches) wide - that's what my notes say!
• visual compression - not always possible to reduce a scenic element (e.g. a building) to an exact scale reduction because the object is often too large for the available space. Or it may not look right on the layout, irrespective of what the 1:1 scale might suggest. In these situations, try compressing the object proportionately by 80-90% and then make to scale (i.e. reduce the proportion of the actual object to be scaled for modelling purposes).

Visual planning aids:

• perspective sketching is helpful (and Iain is quite skilled in this type of art)
• a "planning model" may help visualise your plan. The idea would be to do mock-ups, either in the same scale as your layout or smaller to check positioning and whether it looks right
• establish visual balance for enhanced composition

The clinic I went to next was on room and layout lighting. The clinic was given by a local Christchurch lighting specialist and focused on the different types of lighting, light bulbs and tubes that could be used for a layout and layout room. An early decision that affects lighting is to decide the purpose of the room in which your layout lives. Is the room totally for the layout or are there other purposes? A room just for the layout will have a different emphasis on room lighting than a room with multiple purposes.

The main learning point for me was to look for daylight fluorescent tubes rated at 4200-4800K. Fluorescent tubes still offer better quality lighting for the money than alternatives (such as halogen or LEDs for room and layout lighting). Interestingly, Iain Rice recommended "cool white" lights at 4200K as well.

The second half of the day was spent on a layout tour. I saw layouts at five different homes in the north Christchurch area. The five layouts included three English, three US, and one NZR 1:64 (S scale) layout. And if you can add up, let me explain that a couple of the homes had more than one layout! Scales represented included N, HO, OO, S, and G scale garden railroading.

I really appreciated the time the layout owners gave to host the tour, provide information and respond to questions, and for their obvious delight in running trains! And thanks to our driver who took four of us around in his car. The afternoon was very enjoyable indeed.

The next blog posting will have Day 3 and some photos...stay tuned!

Update

It has been a while since my last blog post. In that time, I have been sorting through all the stuff that has congregated in the garage since our house move late last year. Unfortunately, the garage has become the place to put things when they either don't fit in the house, or where we don't know where to actually put things in the house!


To add to the mess, we had some rain last week and the garage sprung a couple of leaks that caused a few problems, but fortunately not damaging anything of importance.

I am experimenting with shelf support systems at the moment. I am trialling some slotted metal shelving brackets along a short length of wall on one side of the garage. On another wall, I am experimenting with a heavy length of timber dyna-bolted to the brickwork from which an arc shaped piece of plywood is nailed to support the layout benchwork. It was the method used for David Low's previous layout, Parkes, and looks a sturdy and relatively cheap method of layout support.


I'd like to get my layout, Winmar, out of the way too. As mentioned in previous posts, the layout is a single baseboard 8' x 16' and weighs a ton! It currently sits sideways and lengthways up against one of the outer walls of the garage. I need to get some mates around to move the layout outside to the driveway and then look at where to make the saw cuts to try and save the station area for a possible exhibition layout. The layout as it currently exists will not really fit and it no longer suits my model railway preference for operations. It has to go, but perhaps some salvage work can be done.


In the meantime, I also have some solid reading to do with recent issues of AMRM, Model Railway Journal, Model Railroader, and Model Railroad Planning 2010 to get through.

A New Year

2010 is upon us. It's that time of the year for some planning for the year ahead. I certainly look forward to the new year after the instability of last year; moving three times and living in four different houses!

One usually reflects on the past and then commits to a new future by way of a number of resolutions that are rarely kept. I hope to change that pattern with some resolutions that I do hope to keep (I am not silly enough to think I will achieve 100% success). They are:

1. insulate the garage and install a proper ceiling
2. put up additional lighting and more power points
3. have an operating (running) model railway by year end
4. have some scenery/buildings completed
5. log the progress on my blog
6. digitise my prototype railway photos and catalogue them
7. attend at least one major overseas model railway/railroad event

We will see how well I do come this time next year.

Winmar

My layout Winmar, based on a fictional location just north of Albury on the Main South line in New South Wales, should be delivered to our new home at the end of next week. The layout has been stored, among other things, inside a 40 foot container at Allied Pickfords. With the extremely hot weather of late, I am hoping the layout (and other things) will be ok since I am not sure if the container sits out in some open yard or whether the container is under cover in some sort of warehouse.

Anyway, I will take delivery of Winmar on Friday week and have it placed inside the garage for the time being. I am still of the mind to disassemble the layout, lift up the track, and remove most of the wiring to be used again on a new layout. I guess that the condition of the layout when it is unpacked from the container will also have a bearing on my final decision.

Notwithstanding the desire to start afresh, I still really like the layout diagram and the concept of running a branch and an industrial siding off the main body of the layout. Having a small loco depot (Winmar being a junction station) is also a plus.

Here is the layout diagram in original form (click on the image to expand it for viewing). I did make some changes to the arrangement of the track on the baseboard when I actually laid the track down. I made changes to the purple-coloured sidings behind the station, lengthening one of the double sidings and omitting the siding off to the left (still in purple). Also, S7 in the blue-grey colour was extended around as an inside curve and joins the main just short of the entrance to the traverser as a grains loop siding.


Perhaps I might consider taking out just the station "module" and seeing if I can use it within the body of the new layout, although at this stage it is not clear what the new layout will actually look like and nor what final area in the garage I will have to work in. I am also considering whether to use the twelve track traverser (the traverser moves on heavy duty rollers from a computer server stack) since this will be easy to unscrew and keep intact. Suffice to say, the original layout plan as shown in the diagram and with the traverser fiddle yard at the rear is very much likely to change in context ... or disappear all together.

Railway operation is for me

Last night I went over to Rob's place for the monthly operating session on his VR/NSWR layout. The layout uses DCC for loco control and a card operating system based on train sequences.

The experience of operating this layout has reinforced to me that I really love model railway layouts that feature a system of "prototype" operation. Now, this layout wasn't run exactly as on the prototype because it represents a railway line between towns in Victoria and the southeast coast of NSW where no real prototype line existed. But that's not the point: the layout is run as an approximation of prototype railroading with an emphasis on establishing a real purpose for the movement of particular trains and the locations on the line. This blend of operation and railway purpose is what is of greatest interest to me. It also helps to have a good bunch of people to be with during the operating session and Rob's "crew" certainly fits that category.

I am now more seriously considering that when the move to the new home takes place in a couple of weeks time, the "old" layout (Winmar) will get dismantled. I need to build a new layout based on my model railway operation-oriented preferences. My thinking at this stage favours a shelf type of layout. The design of the layout will be planned specifically for the actual size and shape of the available space in the garage of the new house. I shouldn't need to compromise the new layout because of a previously designed and built layout from many years ago; one that was constructed within the parameters of a different overall plan and housed in a different location in Sydney.

The development of Winmar did offer some operational potential with the proposed Lake Hume branch and the industrial siding leading off to the traverser (fiddle yard). However, in the new location in Canberra, a single-top baseboard that is 16' x 8' in size does not really fit conveniently within the space available, and nor does it really offer an easy path for any potential Lake Hume Branch extension in the future.

The stage is therefore set for a new layout design that reflects my current thinking and preferences. The layout will be designed specifically for the new physical space of the garage at the house we move to at the end of the month. I think we have a new beginning...

A new house, a new model railway?

Regular readers might know that I have been looking at buying a house in Canberra for some time now. Well, the house I blogged about on 26th September is now the house that has been purchased. In a month's time we will be living in our own house in Canberra and we can put to an end the renting cycle that has bedevilled us this year.

The house has a separate-standing double garage with two external doors, and two roll-a-doors at the front. The structure used to be a single garage but has been extended to a double. It now incorporates a pitched roof, but the original outer brick wall remains as a central divide in the remodelled double garage.

I mentioned in that previous blog post in September that I was concerned about the brick wall down the centre of the garage. However, I can now report that this isn't such a major problem after all. Firstly, the brick wall doesn't extend all the way to the front of the garage and there is sufficient space to wind a peninsula around the edge. Secondly, the brick wall is certainly strong enough to run a shelf layout around it (and through a couple of the bricks if need be). And thirdly, I can pull the brick wall down if I really have to since it no longer provides any structural support.

The garage has to have insulation added to the walls and under the pitched roof. The walls also have to be lined. I may paint the concrete floor, although I am not so sure that this really helps all that much in preventing the build-up of dust. There also needs to be improved lighting. And oh by the way, somehow I have to find room for a work bench, a couple of steel cabinets, all my tools, gardening equipment, a lawn mower, and three bicycles. And Winmar. Hmmmmmm.

This brings me to my closing thought on this evening's blog post: should I keep my existing layout, Winmar, or should I scrap it and start a new Australian-prototype layout from scratch?

Buying a house for the layout

I spent much of today looking at houses for sale in Canberra. The reason is that the family is sick of renting and we are keen to find somewhere to live that we can call home now that we have settled back into Canberra life (we lived in Canberra for five years in the late 1990s). Naturally, we have some pretty clear ideas as to the type of house we are looking for and what attributes are important to us. You can guess at what I am particularly interested in.

The first problem is that Canberra house prices are ridiculously high; almost as high as Sydney property prices for equivalent stock. The second problem is the complicated triad of relationships between the type of house, location, and the market price (i.e. the price at which someone will pay - often much higher than what most of the houses I have seen so far are actually worth). And thirdly, at what point does one compromise space for that dream layout if nearly all the other desirable attributes of a home can be ticked off the checklist?

The latter point is a problem that I now face after viewing one of the houses for sale today that had most of what we are after within that complicated triad of relationships. The price is within bounds, the basic house layout and structure are ok, and the location is within an acceptable distance from work. And yes, there is a double garage but there is also a solid brick wall down the middle, possibly the original outer wall of an original single garage. The actual length and width of this double garage are also an issue since I don't think there is enough space. The garage is capable of fitting in a car on each side but without too much extra space for anything else (not that I would actually put a car in there!).

I sometimes read about modellers who "build the house around their model railway empire". I'd like to say that this will be possible, but somehow I rather doubt it. Pity really.

Lake Hume

In a previous blog post about my current layout Winmar, I mentioned a possible branch line extension to Lake Hume.

My fictional railway junction of Winmar is just north of Albury. The equally fictional Lake Hume branch extends east towards a real body of water called Lake Hume. A real railway (the Wodonga-Cudgewa line) to Lake Hume exists on the Victorian side of the border. My Lake Hume branch would be the NSW equivalent of the Cudgewa line and would reflect the historical parochialism of state-based railway systems.

As such, some recent thinking has converged around the idea of using my (yet to be constructed) model railway terminus at Lake Hume as the basis for this small exhibition layout I have been rambling on about. If I did this, then this module would be available for both my home-based layout AND for exhibitions. I could develop the module along the lines of a four metre (a bit more than 12 foot) display with a traverser at one end, similar to layouts popular in the UK at exhibitions. I could perhaps turn the terminus into a L-shape with that power station or mineral sands industry extending onto a new baseboard beyond the station and yard itself.

And, what might be doubly appealing, I could run a session using some of my Victorian locos and wagons as well and pretend I was in Victoria! Don't know what the Victorians might think of that scenario but I am sure most exhibition-goers wouldn't know the prototypical difference. Hmmm.

Notes on a layout - Winmar

I was searching through a bundle of papers in the study over the weekend and found my notebook about my Australian layout, Winmar. It was interesting reading to go back a few years and see how some of the ideas formed about the layout. Here are some tidbits from those notes:

• the layout was named after former St Kilda AFL player, Nicky Winmar
• the layout design was influenced by the prototype track configuration at Culcairn and Blayney, both towns in New South Wales, but on different lines.
• I liked the Main South Line for the types of trains I could run (express passenger and varied freight). I also liked the added operational interest generated by using a fictitious pioneer branch (inspired by a Lloyd Holmes article on Culcairn in one of the Byways of Steam books), and just like the lines to Oaklands, Kywong, Westby, and Holbrook.
  
• the layout baseboard had initially been built by my dad in the late 1970's using a 12 inch grid framed at the perimeter by aluminium lengths for rigidity. The baseboard is 16' x 8' with an operating well in the middle. I put a series of formers on the layout to raise the actual baseboard height above the grid so I could fit point motors and dip the scenery. The baseboard is now extremely heavy but after several moves, remains intact.
  
• the 8' long traverser that acts as a fiddle yard first used drawer rollers. These were not strong enough so I decided to use heavier steel rollers used to hold shelves of computer servers. This has been much better, although I intend to put in another roller in the middle to prevent some slight sagging.
• I had initially used a diamond crossing to get from the inner siding to a factory but was later informed that diamond crossings were very rare on the NSWR. I changed that to an 'S' bend from the inner siding to the factory/flour mill/biscuit factory (still undecided on that one) used 24" radius curved Shinohara track. This has since been replaced by 30" curved Shinohara track, requiring an insert in one corner of the operating well to hold the track and the to-be-constructed industry.
• a mixture of Peco and Seep point motors were used. The Seep motors seem a more simple yet just as effective mode of turnout operation.
  
• single track running is fine for home layouts
• the junction behind the station to the left (but at the front of the viewing area) at Winmar offers potential for future extension and the Lake Hume branch is gradually finding some "prototype history" to explain its existence.
• the Lake Hume branch could be used to bring coal to the power station and agricultural supplies to farmers, and ship out timber, livestock and grain. I made a subsequent note that perhaps a mineral sands industry (like Bemax) might be possible.

There were a few more bits and pieces of information in the notebook. However, much of what was important in the early planning and construction days were formed from the thinking recorded in the notebook and mentioned in point form here. Perhaps if I had started a blog back then, there would have been even more revealed and remembered.

Now, if I could find some of the digital photos that either Bob or I have taken of the layout to actually illustrate these notes I'd be very happy!

In the beginning

In the beginning something starts. And so it is with this blog about my thoughts, discussions, observations, and actual application of thinking to model railways. Unlike some other blogs about model railways, this blog is more than just a diary of a model railway layout.

Yet I do have a model railway layout. The layout is based on the New South Wales Government Railways (NSWGR) and subsequent permutations of that railway system. The layout is based on a fictitious town called Winmar located just north of Albury in New South Wales on the single track Main South line. The layout is operational (i.e. the electrics work and I can run a train) but there is no scenery, and no buildings have yet been erected. The layout is 16' x 8' (or roughly 5m x 2.5m) on a single baseboard with an operating well in the middle. The main technical feature of the layout is a moving traverser for a fiddle yard, capable of holding 12 individual trains 6' (2 metres) in length. The actual railway era varies, from 1965 to 2000, ensuring considerable flexibility towards locomotives and rolling stock in keeping with my broad range of interest.

So much for the explanation about the railway layout at this stage.

Now, the intention of this blog is to let loose the ramblings of an experienced (over twenty-five years) armchair modeller with plenty more to do to get where I want to be.

And so, as I say, I am at the start...of this blog...with more to discuss and think about in the future.